0:00:05 > 0:00:09Insurance fraud has reached epidemic levels in the UK.
0:00:09 > 0:00:14It's costing us more than £1.3 billion every year.
0:00:14 > 0:00:17That's almost 3.6 million every day.
0:00:19 > 0:00:24Deliberate crashes, bogus personal injuries, even phantom pets.
0:00:25 > 0:00:29The fraudsters are risking more and more to make a quick killing
0:00:29 > 0:00:33and every year it's adding around £50 to your insurance bill.
0:00:33 > 0:00:35But insurers are fighting back,
0:00:35 > 0:00:39exposing just under 15 fake claims every hour.
0:00:39 > 0:00:44- Armed with covert surveillance systems....- Subject out of vehicle.
0:00:44 > 0:00:46..sophisticated data analysis techniques...
0:00:48 > 0:00:51..and a number of highly skilled police units...
0:00:51 > 0:00:53Police. Don't move. Stay where you are.
0:00:53 > 0:00:55..they are catching the criminals red-handed.
0:00:55 > 0:00:58Just don't lie to us!
0:00:58 > 0:01:01All those conmen, scammers and cheats on the fiddle
0:01:01 > 0:01:04are now caught in the act and claimed and shamed.
0:01:11 > 0:01:14An insurance claim goes up in smoke...
0:01:16 > 0:01:19By this time, major alarm bells were ringing
0:01:19 > 0:01:24because somebody had clearly hidden the stolen items
0:01:24 > 0:01:28in the premises before the fire.
0:01:29 > 0:01:32..a large-scale fraud ring is brought down
0:01:32 > 0:01:34thanks to the exhaustive detective work of insurance staff...
0:01:34 > 0:01:37During the course of our investigation we identified
0:01:37 > 0:01:4060 linked claims totalling £1.2 million.
0:01:44 > 0:01:47..and a fake phone claim is called in.
0:01:47 > 0:01:49I think the only word I can think of is stupidity.
0:01:49 > 0:01:53That an insurer would actually accept those circumstances.
0:01:58 > 0:02:01Once upon a time, making an insurance claim was a simple case
0:02:01 > 0:02:04of filling out a form and waiting for a cheque to arrive in the post.
0:02:04 > 0:02:06However, with modern technology
0:02:06 > 0:02:09and insurers alert to the possibility of fraud,
0:02:09 > 0:02:12today it's a much more involved process.
0:02:12 > 0:02:15And with the police now working alongside insurance companies,
0:02:15 > 0:02:20the chances of spurious claims being detected are higher than ever.
0:02:20 > 0:02:26RSA provide insurance cover to people up and down the country.
0:02:26 > 0:02:29John Beadle heads up their counter-fraud department
0:02:29 > 0:02:32so it's his job to make sure only genuine customers get paid.
0:02:35 > 0:02:38Back in early 2015 he dealt with
0:02:38 > 0:02:41a seemingly devastating home insurance claim.
0:02:41 > 0:02:44Not only had one unlucky couple been burgled,
0:02:44 > 0:02:47but the thief then caused severe damage to their home.
0:02:49 > 0:02:55So, this was a claim for a fire in a house belonging to our policyholder
0:02:55 > 0:02:58whereby in the early hours of the morning
0:02:58 > 0:03:02somebody entered the house, and having stolen
0:03:02 > 0:03:06several items of property from the lounge then,
0:03:06 > 0:03:11using the policyholder's own white spirit and matches,
0:03:11 > 0:03:14set fire to the kitchen.
0:03:16 > 0:03:19The house was substantially damaged in the fire.
0:03:19 > 0:03:22Fortunately, nobody was injured.
0:03:22 > 0:03:24The couple had had a narrow escape.
0:03:24 > 0:03:27However, the claim was substantial.
0:03:27 > 0:03:28With their stolen items,
0:03:28 > 0:03:31which included expensive computer equipment,
0:03:31 > 0:03:34the fire damage to the house and the cost involved
0:03:34 > 0:03:38in temporarily rehousing them, it totalled a staggering amount.
0:03:38 > 0:03:40Just over £80,000.
0:03:44 > 0:03:47RSA and the authorities began investigations
0:03:47 > 0:03:50which almost immediately sparked concerns.
0:03:52 > 0:03:56The police and indeed ourselves were suspicious
0:03:56 > 0:04:00of the circumstances surrounding the fire.
0:04:01 > 0:04:05There was no signs of forced entry or exit
0:04:05 > 0:04:10and the fire had actually been started
0:04:10 > 0:04:13with some domestic white spirit and, indeed,
0:04:13 > 0:04:16using matches that were in the kitchen.
0:04:16 > 0:04:20And I think if you were going to be subject of an attack
0:04:20 > 0:04:24by arsonists they would normally bring their own materials with them.
0:04:26 > 0:04:28RSA and the police couldn't understand why the thief
0:04:28 > 0:04:31would want to set fire to the house.
0:04:31 > 0:04:33The robbery had been a success.
0:04:33 > 0:04:35They'd stolen expensive goods undetected.
0:04:35 > 0:04:38Why not just creep away quietly?
0:04:38 > 0:04:41John turned his attention to the official statements given
0:04:41 > 0:04:44by the unfortunate husband and wife who owned the house.
0:04:47 > 0:04:52The gentleman couldn't really account for his whereabouts
0:04:52 > 0:04:54at the time of the fire.
0:04:54 > 0:04:59He was allegedly staying nearby with some friends
0:04:59 > 0:05:03but that was not verified at that time.
0:05:04 > 0:05:07The claim was looking more and more dubious.
0:05:07 > 0:05:09But John needed hard evidence
0:05:09 > 0:05:13if he was going to prove it was indeed fraudulent.
0:05:13 > 0:05:16It wasn't long before that emerged.
0:05:16 > 0:05:19When properties have sustained fire damage, experts are sent in
0:05:19 > 0:05:23to ensure the house is safe before any repairs can start.
0:05:23 > 0:05:26They are called the Disaster Rectification Team.
0:05:26 > 0:05:30In this case they found it a lot more than they bargained for.
0:05:30 > 0:05:35Whilst they were going about their work they actually discovered
0:05:35 > 0:05:41that secreted in the base of an upstairs divan bed were the
0:05:41 > 0:05:46alleged stolen items that were taken from the downstairs of the premises.
0:05:46 > 0:05:52By this time, major alarm bells were ringing, because somebody had
0:05:52 > 0:05:58clearly hidden the stolen items in the premises before the fire.
0:05:58 > 0:06:02This led to only one possible conclusion.
0:06:02 > 0:06:04No burglary had ever taken place.
0:06:04 > 0:06:07The validity of the claim melted away.
0:06:07 > 0:06:11We reported what had been found to the police and the police
0:06:11 > 0:06:16subsequently arrested both the gentleman and his wife.
0:06:16 > 0:06:19However, there was a very sad twist.
0:06:20 > 0:06:26This case was complicated by the tragic
0:06:26 > 0:06:29subsequent death of the gentleman,
0:06:29 > 0:06:34where he died of a completely unrelated illness in hospital.
0:06:36 > 0:06:41After his death, his wife contacted the police
0:06:41 > 0:06:48and said that the idea for starting the fire was indeed her husband's.
0:06:48 > 0:06:52He'd hidden the property and started the fire
0:06:52 > 0:06:57with the intention of making a fraudulent insurance claim.
0:06:57 > 0:06:59The case was closed.
0:06:59 > 0:07:02It was a tragic end to one man's calculated attempt to defraud RSA
0:07:02 > 0:07:05out of more than £80,000.
0:07:05 > 0:07:07The outcome of this case,
0:07:07 > 0:07:10because of the circumstances,
0:07:10 > 0:07:16we clearly cancelled the policy and the family received no payment
0:07:16 > 0:07:19from us in respect of the fire.
0:07:25 > 0:07:27Still to come,
0:07:27 > 0:07:31a phantom passenger tries to submit a personal injury claim.
0:07:31 > 0:07:34The start of the sinister case of the white van hauntings.
0:07:39 > 0:07:43Now, when we get behind the wheel car insurance offers peace of mind
0:07:43 > 0:07:44that in the event of an accident,
0:07:44 > 0:07:46our repair costs will be taken care of
0:07:46 > 0:07:49and we'll be compensated for any loss.
0:07:49 > 0:07:53While for most of us that's the sole purpose of motor insurance
0:07:53 > 0:07:57there are some out there who see it as a way to make serious money
0:07:57 > 0:08:01by defrauding insurers out of tens of thousands of pounds
0:08:01 > 0:08:04with staged collisions, grossly exaggerated claims
0:08:04 > 0:08:07and even accidents that never happened.
0:08:10 > 0:08:13Thankfully, insurance companies like Direct Line Group are getting
0:08:13 > 0:08:18better and better at detecting fraud and stopping it in its tracks.
0:08:18 > 0:08:21Their staff, using sophisticated computer programs,
0:08:21 > 0:08:25carefully examine policies, looking for anything which may suggest
0:08:25 > 0:08:27that there are fraudsters at work.
0:08:29 > 0:08:33Back in 2011, Mark Chiappino, a fraud manager at DLG,
0:08:33 > 0:08:35was alerted to several claims from people
0:08:35 > 0:08:38who had been involved in car accidents.
0:08:41 > 0:08:44We were receiving lots of claims from the North London area
0:08:44 > 0:08:47and on first inspection they appear to be genuine claims.
0:08:47 > 0:08:49Deeper investigation, however,
0:08:49 > 0:08:52revealed lots of common factors between these claims.
0:08:52 > 0:08:55The same firms kept cropping up again and again,
0:08:55 > 0:08:57the same accident management companies,
0:08:57 > 0:09:01the same hire companies, the same garages and recovery people.
0:09:01 > 0:09:04Also, we discovered that a lot of the policies had only very recently
0:09:04 > 0:09:08been taken out and were using fictitious mail drop addresses.
0:09:08 > 0:09:10In fact, there was far too many similarities
0:09:10 > 0:09:12for this to be a coincidence.
0:09:15 > 0:09:18Mark and his team suspected they had honed in on a fraud ring.
0:09:18 > 0:09:22In this case a network of criminals conspiring together to lie about
0:09:22 > 0:09:25being involved in car accidents
0:09:25 > 0:09:28in order to receive large insurance pay-outs.
0:09:28 > 0:09:31Direct Line Group sent out specialist forensic engineers
0:09:31 > 0:09:35to examine the cars that had supposedly crashed into each other.
0:09:37 > 0:09:40Inspection of some of the vehicles involved in these claims
0:09:40 > 0:09:42showed that in fact they have never been near each other.
0:09:42 > 0:09:45We also discovered some of the damage to these vehicles was totally
0:09:45 > 0:09:49inconsistent with the circumstances that had been described.
0:09:49 > 0:09:52Mark was certain about what was really going on.
0:09:53 > 0:09:55The attempted scam works by either having
0:09:55 > 0:09:58a fictitious accident that never actually occurred
0:09:58 > 0:10:01or deliberately crashing two vehicles together.
0:10:05 > 0:10:08The parties involved would then claim for numerous items,
0:10:08 > 0:10:12including injuries, whiplash, storage of vehicles,
0:10:12 > 0:10:16recovery of vehicles, hire of new replacement vehicles, etc.
0:10:16 > 0:10:18This was a deliberate targeting of Direct Line Group
0:10:18 > 0:10:20solely for financial gain.
0:10:20 > 0:10:24These weren't opportunists, this is a deliberate scam.
0:10:24 > 0:10:27Once the team at Direct Line Group knew what they were looking for,
0:10:27 > 0:10:31the amount of claims that were part of the scam mushroomed.
0:10:31 > 0:10:35During the course of our investigation we identified
0:10:35 > 0:10:3760 linked claims totalling £1.2 million.
0:10:40 > 0:10:42A staggering figure.
0:10:42 > 0:10:46Understandably, Direct Line Group needed help.
0:10:46 > 0:10:49They got in touch with their solicitors, Keoghs, to assist with
0:10:49 > 0:10:53further investigations and represent them in any legal proceedings.
0:10:53 > 0:10:57Ruth Needham, a lawyer who specialises in investigating
0:10:57 > 0:11:01fraud rings, remembers when she first heard from Direct Line Group.
0:11:03 > 0:11:06So, in early 2011 we had that phone call that I sometimes get saying,
0:11:06 > 0:11:08"We've got something, it looks massive.
0:11:08 > 0:11:10"Can you come and help us with it?"
0:11:10 > 0:11:14DLG have a great team that have done this several times
0:11:14 > 0:11:16so very quickly, we were able to get into a position
0:11:16 > 0:11:18with DLG where we could repudiate.
0:11:18 > 0:11:21So we could say to these individuals,
0:11:21 > 0:11:23"You're not going to be getting paid on these cases.
0:11:23 > 0:11:26"We don't believe for one moment what you're telling us is true."
0:11:26 > 0:11:30With Keoghs' support, Direct Line Group told all the claimants
0:11:30 > 0:11:33not yet paid that they wouldn't be receiving a penny.
0:11:33 > 0:11:36Several of them came back and said they would sue for payments
0:11:36 > 0:11:41they felt they were owed and started legal proceedings.
0:11:41 > 0:11:44We started out with nine cases that were being made against DLG.
0:11:44 > 0:11:47Eight of those cases, with the evidence we presented,
0:11:47 > 0:11:51the individuals withdrew their cases and discontinued as it's called.
0:11:51 > 0:11:53One of the cases - the eighth case out of the nine -
0:11:53 > 0:11:56proceeded to trial but they were unsuccessful in trial.
0:11:56 > 0:11:58They lost at trial.
0:11:58 > 0:12:01A victory for Direct Line Group.
0:12:01 > 0:12:03All the unpaid claims were cancelled.
0:12:03 > 0:12:09But Keoghs and DLG didn't stop there and continued their investigations.
0:12:09 > 0:12:11When we initially got to the point
0:12:11 > 0:12:14that the evidence was strong enough to say to individual claimants,
0:12:14 > 0:12:15"You're not going to get paid,"
0:12:15 > 0:12:17we sent out, again, investigators to say,
0:12:17 > 0:12:19let's see if they want to give another segment.
0:12:19 > 0:12:23Let's ask them some questions and confront them with some of the evidence that we have.
0:12:23 > 0:12:26And we then managed to get some witness statements from
0:12:26 > 0:12:28individuals who admitted that it was set-up.
0:12:28 > 0:12:31That it was all lies and they'd done it for lots of desperate reasons.
0:12:31 > 0:12:34People weren't in a hurry to tell us who told them
0:12:34 > 0:12:36because of fear of retribution, we can only assume,
0:12:36 > 0:12:39but that was at the point when we were confident.
0:12:39 > 0:12:42Once you've got a statement that's signed from somebody who says
0:12:42 > 0:12:45this is made up you are reasonably strong in your evidence
0:12:45 > 0:12:47to say we can continue with what we're doing.
0:12:47 > 0:12:49This is just completely illogical.
0:12:49 > 0:12:54Direct Line Group had paid out money on some of the car crash claims
0:12:54 > 0:12:58they now knew to be bogus before the fraud was spotted so they,
0:12:58 > 0:13:00along with Ruth and her team at Keoghs,
0:13:00 > 0:13:02wanted to take things further.
0:13:04 > 0:13:07We started to work on a tort of deceit action.
0:13:07 > 0:13:10The tort of deceit, in layman's terms,
0:13:10 > 0:13:12basically involves somebody being dishonest.
0:13:12 > 0:13:14You recognising they've been dishonest and you making
0:13:14 > 0:13:18a payment, unfortunately, before you established that dishonesty.
0:13:18 > 0:13:20We therefore sued these individuals to get back any money they
0:13:20 > 0:13:23had been paid but also there was another element to it
0:13:23 > 0:13:25which is called exemplary damages, and that is a
0:13:25 > 0:13:28punishment for the fact that you've lied to the courts,
0:13:28 > 0:13:33to the insurers, and you must pay extra money for the punishment.
0:13:33 > 0:13:37Direct Line Group and Keoghs turned the tables on this criminal gang
0:13:37 > 0:13:39and took 29 of them to court.
0:13:41 > 0:13:44In November 2015, we issued proceedings against each of
0:13:44 > 0:13:47these individuals for the return of monies paid,
0:13:47 > 0:13:49and this actually came to trial in June of this year
0:13:49 > 0:13:51and none of the individuals attended.
0:13:51 > 0:13:53They didn't come to defend themselves,
0:13:53 > 0:13:55they didn't come to explain themselves.
0:13:55 > 0:13:57They were quite happy for the judge
0:13:57 > 0:13:59to decide how much they needed to pay back.
0:13:59 > 0:14:05The judge decided that the claimants had to pay damages of £175,000.
0:14:05 > 0:14:07A great result.
0:14:07 > 0:14:10But the fact that the fraud ring had been stopped in its tracks
0:14:10 > 0:14:11was a win in itself.
0:14:11 > 0:14:15It's critically important that people realise the importance
0:14:15 > 0:14:17of combating this type of fraud.
0:14:17 > 0:14:20The cash that comes from this type of fraud when it is paid out,
0:14:20 > 0:14:23where does it go to? It certainly doesn't go to help society.
0:14:23 > 0:14:27If anything it seems to be a cash flow for the more criminal
0:14:27 > 0:14:30aspect of our communities and it's important for all of us
0:14:30 > 0:14:32to ensure that we stop that wherever we can,
0:14:32 > 0:14:35whether we are aware of it happening and we need to report it
0:14:35 > 0:14:37or if we can assist in giving evidence.
0:14:37 > 0:14:40It is incredibly important we stop this cash flow of money
0:14:40 > 0:14:43going to the criminal fraternity.
0:14:43 > 0:14:46For Mark and his team back at DLG the fact that the criminals
0:14:46 > 0:14:50had been ordered not only to pay back their costs but also
0:14:50 > 0:14:54extra money as punishment for the fraud was a huge success.
0:14:55 > 0:14:59This was a great result for us and a terrible result for them.
0:14:59 > 0:15:01The hunter became the hunted.
0:15:05 > 0:15:08Now, I'm no Derren Brown but I like to think
0:15:08 > 0:15:10I'm a pretty good judge of character.
0:15:10 > 0:15:13But there is one fraud detection company
0:15:13 > 0:15:15that takes it to a whole new level.
0:15:15 > 0:15:19i-COG specialises in the technique of conversation management.
0:15:19 > 0:15:21You could call them human lie detectors.
0:15:22 > 0:15:26Identifying fraud at the highest level requires a certain skill set.
0:15:26 > 0:15:30Something that Tara Shelton of i-COG knows all about.
0:15:32 > 0:15:35I have been a hostage negotiator, a firearms officer,
0:15:35 > 0:15:38I've been involved in major investigations.
0:15:38 > 0:15:41Not forgetting her degree in psychology.
0:15:41 > 0:15:44If MI5 are recruiting I know just the person.
0:15:44 > 0:15:46Just by talking to someone on the phone,
0:15:46 > 0:15:49Tara can tell whether their claim is genuine.
0:15:49 > 0:15:53What we actually do is measure their behaviour throughout the call
0:15:53 > 0:15:57against 27 deceptive indicators and then these are given
0:15:57 > 0:16:00a weighting on the basis of what the handler believes
0:16:00 > 0:16:03and can evidence as to what they've heard.
0:16:03 > 0:16:07Tara's approach is different to traditional fraud detection techniques.
0:16:07 > 0:16:09People assume that they have to be
0:16:09 > 0:16:12louder than the next person in order to have control.
0:16:12 > 0:16:14No. Control that we get
0:16:14 > 0:16:18is by knowing we have control, but saying less.
0:16:18 > 0:16:20Which means that if the claimant is lying,
0:16:20 > 0:16:24it will be obvious to an expert like Tara.
0:16:24 > 0:16:27What is often missed to the untrained ear
0:16:27 > 0:16:30is that when someone is actually under a position of stress,
0:16:30 > 0:16:36the heart beats faster, breathing changes, voice pitch changes.
0:16:36 > 0:16:40And that's the level of detail that we actually listen at.
0:16:40 > 0:16:43So, for anyone trying to put through a fraudulent claim,
0:16:43 > 0:16:47Tara is the last person they'd want picking up the phone.
0:16:47 > 0:16:49I think I'd be pretty certain in saying we wouldn't be
0:16:49 > 0:16:52the fraudsters' choice for phone a friend.
0:16:52 > 0:16:56One of Tara's recent cases involved what seemed like a simple loss.
0:16:58 > 0:17:02We'd been notified of a claim from a client where a soldier had
0:17:02 > 0:17:07notified them that he had lost two high-end mobile phone handsets,
0:17:07 > 0:17:09same brand but completely different models.
0:17:09 > 0:17:14The approximate value of the claim collectively was around £1,000.
0:17:14 > 0:17:17A tidy sum, but not something that would automatically be paid out,
0:17:17 > 0:17:19no questions asked.
0:17:19 > 0:17:22Clearly, Tara needed to do more digging.
0:17:24 > 0:17:27I was unable to get hold of the claimant because the mobile
0:17:27 > 0:17:31number he provided was actually a mobile phone for one of the
0:17:31 > 0:17:33handsets that he said he'd lost.
0:17:33 > 0:17:36OK, let's give him the benefit of the doubt.
0:17:36 > 0:17:39Tara eventually pinned down the claimant via e-mail and was
0:17:39 > 0:17:43finally given a working member to call him on.
0:17:43 > 0:17:45He was cooperative but quite aloof.
0:17:45 > 0:17:49Very full of self-confidence and rather dismissive
0:17:49 > 0:17:51of the claims process.
0:17:59 > 0:18:03One of the main aims was to get his version of events.
0:18:04 > 0:18:06He had stated that he was abroad
0:18:06 > 0:18:08on exercise for probably a period of five weeks.
0:18:16 > 0:18:19Most people investigating insurance claims wouldn't be able
0:18:19 > 0:18:23to relate to this scenario but Tara isn't most people.
0:18:24 > 0:18:27As my past experience as a police firearms officer
0:18:27 > 0:18:31I was very aware of the activities that generally take place
0:18:31 > 0:18:35during a day's exercise and straightaway some of the memory
0:18:35 > 0:18:38that he presented just didn't ring true.
0:19:09 > 0:19:12Despite having forked out for top-of-the-range handsets fitted
0:19:12 > 0:19:17with tracking software, the claimant presented himself as a technophobe.
0:19:17 > 0:19:20He didn't know how to use the technology on those devices
0:19:20 > 0:19:24to locate phones. It just didn't seem reasonable to me.
0:19:24 > 0:19:28At this point in the call Tara's psychology training came into play.
0:19:28 > 0:19:34What's really important with losses is to tap into what I call the sensory memory of the customer.
0:19:34 > 0:19:39I asked him something very simple, which was to describe the rucksack that he was carrying on exercise.
0:19:49 > 0:19:53Immediately he focused on the two areas where the phone handsets
0:19:53 > 0:19:56were actually in and that wasn't what I was asking.
0:19:56 > 0:20:00What I was hearing at the time was someone who was not only delivering
0:20:00 > 0:20:04a scripted delivery but there were long pauses before the next answer.
0:20:14 > 0:20:17And, again, to the trained ear that's someone who is giving
0:20:17 > 0:20:20themselves thinking time before they answer.
0:20:20 > 0:20:23Tara had given the soldier an opportunity to tell his side
0:20:23 > 0:20:25of the story but he'd failed to convince.
0:20:25 > 0:20:29The time had come to change strategy and confront him.
0:20:29 > 0:20:33He soon realised he'd been outflanked.
0:20:33 > 0:20:37As soon as he became aware that I had concerns with the claim
0:20:37 > 0:20:42he presented, his tactics just completely changed.
0:20:42 > 0:20:44And to say that he lost control on the phone
0:20:44 > 0:20:47was probably an understatement.
0:21:20 > 0:21:23But the real bombshell was still to come.
0:21:23 > 0:21:26He'd landed himself in it when he sent Tara
0:21:26 > 0:21:28his contact details by e-mail.
0:21:28 > 0:21:33It was quite clear at that stage that I needed to confront him.
0:21:50 > 0:21:53And when I actually did that, the immediate answer after silence was "no",
0:21:53 > 0:21:57which was rather unbelievable seeing as I was looking at that e-mail
0:21:57 > 0:21:59at the time I asked him that question.
0:21:59 > 0:22:03The claimant had well and truly shot himself in the foot.
0:22:03 > 0:22:07For me that was the killer piece to deliver as a concern to him.
0:22:07 > 0:22:11That's when it became very clear to me that he had been outmanoeuvred.
0:22:23 > 0:22:28Well, that should have been that, but the customer wasn't prepared to surrender yet.
0:22:28 > 0:22:32After the call ended, I received an e-mail from him,
0:22:32 > 0:22:34this time from a different device,
0:22:34 > 0:22:38saying that he wished to withdraw the claim of the handset that
0:22:38 > 0:22:43he'd originally e-mailed me on, thanking me for my professional
0:22:43 > 0:22:46conduct, but he still wanted to continue with the other claim.
0:22:46 > 0:22:49Tara wasn't having any of it.
0:22:49 > 0:22:52We can't separate one claim into two.
0:22:52 > 0:22:56The methodology is still there, the scenario that he described is still there.
0:22:56 > 0:22:59For me I think the only word that I can think of is stupidity,
0:22:59 > 0:23:02that an insurer would actually accept his circumstances.
0:23:04 > 0:23:06This was one battle the soldier couldn't win.
0:23:06 > 0:23:10His false claim had been well and truly defeated.
0:23:10 > 0:23:14Make no mistake, if you try and slip a fraudulent claim
0:23:14 > 0:23:16through the net, it will be caught.
0:23:22 > 0:23:24Car owners, listen up.
0:23:24 > 0:23:28There are 35 million registered vehicles in the UK and with
0:23:28 > 0:23:32so much traffic it is inevitable that accidents will happen.
0:23:32 > 0:23:35Navigating high levels of traffic is a challenge at the best of
0:23:35 > 0:23:38times but it is especially true if you are driving
0:23:38 > 0:23:41a ten-metre long 11½ tonne bus.
0:23:51 > 0:23:54Lee Ingram is the fraud manager for Transportation Claims,
0:23:54 > 0:23:56which is part of First Group.
0:23:56 > 0:23:59One such claim recently landed on Lee's desk.
0:23:59 > 0:24:02On the face of it, it appeared genuine.
0:24:02 > 0:24:06The circumstances of this incident were that the gentleman was alleging
0:24:06 > 0:24:10that our bus had gone past his parked van and the wing mirror
0:24:10 > 0:24:12had just clipped the van.
0:24:12 > 0:24:14Although this was quite a minor impact
0:24:14 > 0:24:16he was also alleging that this had caused him to be thrown
0:24:16 > 0:24:19forwards and backwards in his van and subsequently caused him injury.
0:24:19 > 0:24:22The claimant went into some detail about how badly
0:24:22 > 0:24:24he had been hurt in the incident.
0:24:24 > 0:24:27The driver of the vehicle was alleging that he had suffered
0:24:27 > 0:24:30a neck and lower back whiplash type injury.
0:24:30 > 0:24:33Two months on, he was still having aching in his back.
0:24:33 > 0:24:36We also received a call from the passenger in the van,
0:24:36 > 0:24:39who also alleged he'd suffered from some lower back injuries
0:24:39 > 0:24:41and subsequent headaches.
0:24:41 > 0:24:44The alleged injuries were very serious
0:24:44 > 0:24:46and could have long-term consequences.
0:24:46 > 0:24:49The soft tissue injuries that can occur to the neck
0:24:49 > 0:24:53can vary from those that will last for a week
0:24:53 > 0:24:56to those that will cause lifetime injuries.
0:24:56 > 0:24:59The potential cost to the company was significant.
0:24:59 > 0:25:02With the costs and the actual injuries themselves
0:25:02 > 0:25:06we're probably looking at round about £7,500-£10,000 between them.
0:25:06 > 0:25:10With such a large amount of money at stake, Lee needed to be sure
0:25:10 > 0:25:13that the claimant's version of events checked out.
0:25:13 > 0:25:16These days every bus is fitted with multiple cameras,
0:25:16 > 0:25:18both inside and out.
0:25:18 > 0:25:24In a case like this, the interior recording can be particularly revealing.
0:25:24 > 0:25:27As I'm watching this I'm expecting to see some sort of reaction
0:25:27 > 0:25:33from the passengers to the collision that has happened outside the bus.
0:25:33 > 0:25:36Viewers of a nervous disposition may want to look away.
0:25:36 > 0:25:41The crash is coming up in three, two, one... Wait, what?
0:25:42 > 0:25:45You can quite clearly see there is no reaction.
0:25:45 > 0:25:47They just carry on as if nothing has happened.
0:25:47 > 0:25:50And the realisation that nothing had happened was confirmed when
0:25:50 > 0:25:54Lee looked at the exterior footage. It's barely noticeable.
0:25:54 > 0:25:59Even using the magic of television to zoom in and slow it down reveals diddly squat.
0:25:59 > 0:26:02We then look at the driver in the van.
0:26:02 > 0:26:05Is he moving forwards and backwards to cause him the alleged
0:26:05 > 0:26:08whiplash injury? I can't see any movement from him.
0:26:08 > 0:26:10Me neither.
0:26:10 > 0:26:13But as it turned out that wasn't even the biggest issue with the claim.
0:26:13 > 0:26:16Assessing whether the passenger has been injured by his forward
0:26:16 > 0:26:19and backward movement is going to prove a little more difficult
0:26:19 > 0:26:22because as you can see he's not even in the van.
0:26:22 > 0:26:26Either this is another example of a great successful investigation
0:26:26 > 0:26:28resulting in repudiation of a claim
0:26:28 > 0:26:33or it's the start of the sinister case of the white van hauntings.
0:26:33 > 0:26:37The claim defied all logic. Not to mention the laws of physics.
0:26:37 > 0:26:40Even the great Sir Isaac Newton would have sleepless nights trying
0:26:40 > 0:26:43to prove how a non-existent force upon
0:26:43 > 0:26:46a non-existent individual could cause a whiplash claim.
0:26:46 > 0:26:49It's enough to give you a headache, just thinking about it.
0:26:49 > 0:26:53You don't have to be a scientific genius to figure out what happened next.
0:26:53 > 0:26:56Both of these claims were repudiated and we didn't pay a penny.
0:26:56 > 0:26:58That's not surprising really,
0:26:58 > 0:27:01when you consider if they're going to pursue this claim it's going to have to go before a judge.
0:27:01 > 0:27:04Once he sees that the passenger is not actually in the vehicle
0:27:04 > 0:27:07he's going to think, "What else is actually false about this claim?"
0:27:07 > 0:27:10No solicitor in their right mind is going to take this client on.
0:27:10 > 0:27:14It's hard for anyone to argue with CCTV.
0:27:14 > 0:27:16Especially if they don't even exist.
0:27:16 > 0:27:21It's important that we crack down on these types of claims for a number of reasons.
0:27:21 > 0:27:24The first one is probably the financial reason.
0:27:24 > 0:27:26The more claims that go to insurance companies
0:27:26 > 0:27:29the more premiums go up, that's costing you money.
0:27:29 > 0:27:33It can't be right for someone to make a dishonest living
0:27:33 > 0:27:37out of putting in claims like this when the majority of us
0:27:37 > 0:27:40just go around our daily business making an honest buck.
0:27:40 > 0:27:43It's, I think, incumbent upon all of us to do what we can
0:27:43 > 0:27:46to make sure these people are exposed.
0:27:51 > 0:27:54Whether it's exaggerating real injuries,
0:27:54 > 0:27:56totally making up a story for a dodgy claim
0:27:56 > 0:28:00or masterminding insurance fraud on an industrial scale,
0:28:00 > 0:28:02insurers are coming down hard
0:28:02 > 0:28:04on the people who think they can make a quick buck
0:28:04 > 0:28:06with their scams and cons.
0:28:06 > 0:28:09But the fraudsters need to think again
0:28:09 > 0:28:12as more of them than ever before are being caught in the act
0:28:12 > 0:28:14and claimed and shamed.